Decoys for docking.

Molecular docking is widely used to predict novel lead compounds for drug discovery. Success depends on the quality of the docking scoring function, among other factors. An imperfect scoring function can mislead by predicting incorrect ligand geometries or by selecting nonbinding molecules over true ligands. These false-positive hits may be considered "decoys". Although these decoys are frustrating, they potentially provide important tests for a docking algorithm; the more subtle the decoy, the more rigorous the test. Indeed, decoy databases have been used to improve protein structure prediction algorithms and protein-protein docking algorithms. Here, we describe 20 geometric decoys in five enzymes and 166 "hit list" decoys-i.e., molecules predicted to bind by our docking program that were tested and found not to do so-for beta-lactamase and two cavity sites in lysozyme. Especially in the cavity sites, which are very simple, these decoys highlight particular weaknesses in our scoring function. We also consider the performance of five other widely used docking scoring functions against our geometric and hit list decoys. Intriguingly, whereas many of these other scoring functions performed better on the geometric decoys, they typically performed worse on the hit list decoys, often highly ranking molecules that seemed to poorly complement the model sites. Several of these "hits"from the other scoring functions were tested experimentally and found, in fact, to be decoys. Collectively, these decoys provide a tool for the development and improvement of molecular docking scoring functions. Such improvements may, in turn, be rapidly tested experimentally against these and related experimental systems, which are well-behaved in assays and for structure determination.

[1]  J M Blaney,et al.  A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. , 1982, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Structure-based design of nonpeptide inhibitors specific for the human immunodeficiency virus 1 protease. , 1990, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  S E Ealick,et al.  Application of crystallographic and modeling methods in the design of purine nucleoside phosphorylase inhibitors. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  B. Matthews,et al.  A cavity-containing mutant of T4 lysozyme is stabilized by buried benzene , 1993, Nature.

[5]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Automated docking with grid‐based energy evaluation , 1992 .

[6]  C. Sander,et al.  Evaluation of protein models by atomic solvation preference. , 1992, Journal of molecular biology.

[7]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Matching chemistry and shape in molecular docking. , 1993, Protein engineering.

[8]  B. Matthews,et al.  Energetic origins of specificity of ligand binding in an interior nonpolar cavity of T4 lysozyme. , 1995, Biochemistry.

[9]  L A Mirny,et al.  How to derive a protein folding potential? A new approach to an old problem. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[10]  Donald G. Truhlar,et al.  MODEL FOR AQUEOUS SOLVATION BASED ON CLASS IV ATOMIC CHARGES AND FIRST SOLVATION SHELL EFFECTS , 1996 .

[11]  M. Levitt,et al.  Energy functions that discriminate X-ray and near native folds from well-constructed decoys. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[12]  Daniel A. Gschwend,et al.  Orientational sampling and rigid-body minimization in molecular docking revisited: On-the-fly optimization and degeneracy removal , 1996, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[13]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[14]  Z. Otwinowski,et al.  Processing of X-ray diffraction data collected in oscillation mode. , 1997, Methods in enzymology.

[15]  M. Sternberg,et al.  Modelling protein docking using shape complementarity, electrostatics and biochemical information. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[16]  Donald G. Truhlar,et al.  New Class IV Charge Model for Extracting Accurate Partial Charges from Wave Functions , 1998 .

[17]  R J Read,et al.  Crystallography & NMR system: A new software suite for macromolecular structure determination. , 1998, Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography.

[18]  B. Shoichet,et al.  Flexible ligand docking using conformational ensembles , 1998, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[19]  L. A. Lipscomb,et al.  Context‐dependent protein stabilization by methionine‐to‐leucine substitution shown in T4 lysozyme , 1998, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[20]  Richard Bonneau,et al.  Ab initio protein structure prediction of CASP III targets using ROSETTA , 1999, Proteins.

[21]  Y. Martin,et al.  A general and fast scoring function for protein-ligand interactions: a simplified potential approach. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[22]  A. Olson,et al.  Modelling of Factor Xa‐inhibitor complexes: a computational flexible docking approach , 1999, Proteins.

[23]  P Burkhard,et al.  The discovery of steroids and other novel FKBP inhibitors using a molecular docking program. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[24]  D. Kostrewa,et al.  Novel inhibitors of DNA gyrase: 3D structure based biased needle screening, hit validation by biophysical methods, and 3D guided optimization. A promising alternative to random screening. , 2000, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[25]  R A Goldstein,et al.  How to generate improved potentials for protein tertiary structure prediction: A lattice model study , 2000, Proteins.

[26]  M J Sternberg,et al.  Protein-Protein Docking: Generation and Filtering of Complexes , 2000 .

[27]  S. Vajda,et al.  Scoring docked conformations generated by rigid‐body protein‐protein docking , 2000, Proteins.

[28]  Gennady Verkhivker,et al.  Deciphering common failures in molecular docking of ligand-protein complexes , 2000, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[29]  R Samudrala,et al.  Decoys ‘R’ Us: A database of incorrect conformations to improve protein structure prediction , 2000, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[30]  R. Elber,et al.  Distance‐dependent, pair potential for protein folding: Results from linear optimization , 2000, Proteins.

[31]  G Klebe,et al.  A new target for shigellosis: rational design and crystallographic studies of inhibitors of tRNA-guanine transglycosylase. , 2000, Journal of molecular biology.

[32]  D. Vanderwall,et al.  Inhibitors of dihydrodipicolinate reductase, a key enzyme of the diaminopimelate pathway of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. , 2001, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[33]  B. Matthews,et al.  Docking molecules by families to increase the diversity of hits in database screens: Computational strategy and experimental evaluation , 2001, Proteins.

[34]  M. Mizutani,et al.  Discovery of novel aldose reductase inhibitors using a protein structure-based approach: 3D-database search followed by design and synthesis. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[35]  I. Enyedy,et al.  Discovery of small-molecule inhibitors of Bcl-2 through structure-based computer screening. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[36]  Rebecca C. Wade,et al.  Protein‐Protein Docking , 2001 .

[37]  M Rarey,et al.  Detailed analysis of scoring functions for virtual screening. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[38]  R Abagyan,et al.  High-throughput docking for lead generation. , 2001, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[39]  K. Fukasawa,et al.  Structure-based generation of a new class of potent Cdk4 inhibitors: new de novo design strategy and library design. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[40]  L. T. Ten Eyck,et al.  Protein docking using continuum electrostatics and geometric fit. , 2001, Protein engineering.

[41]  B. Shoichet,et al.  Molecular docking and high-throughput screening for novel inhibitors of protein tyrosine phosphatase-1B. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[42]  B. Shoichet,et al.  A common mechanism underlying promiscuous inhibitors from virtual and high-throughput screening. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[43]  Anthony K. Felts,et al.  Distinguishing native conformations of proteins from decoys with an effective free energy estimator based on the OPLS all‐atom force field and the surface generalized born solvent model , 2002, Proteins.

[44]  G. Whitesides,et al.  Combinatorial computational method gives new picomolar ligands for a known enzyme , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[45]  Bohdan Waszkowycz,et al.  PRO_SELECT: combining structure-based drug design and array-based chemistry for rapid lead discovery. 2. The development of a series of highly potent and selective factor Xa inhibitors. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[46]  Brian K Shoichet,et al.  Structure-based discovery of a novel, noncovalent inhibitor of AmpC beta-lactamase. , 2002, Structure.

[47]  Brian K. Shoichet,et al.  Structure-Based Discovery of a Novel, Noncovalent Inhibitor of AmpC β-Lactamase , 2002 .

[48]  E. Shakhnovich,et al.  SMall Molecule Growth 2001 (SMoG2001): an improved knowledge-based scoring function for protein-ligand interactions. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[49]  B. Matthews,et al.  A model binding site for testing scoring functions in molecular docking. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.

[50]  G. Klebe,et al.  Approaches to the Description and Prediction of the Binding Affinity of Small-Molecule Ligands to Macromolecular Receptors , 2002 .

[51]  D. Fabbro,et al.  Discovery of a potent and selective protein kinase CK2 inhibitor by high-throughput docking. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[52]  Sandor Vajda,et al.  Combination of scoring functions improves discrimination in protein–protein docking , 2003, Proteins.

[53]  Renxiao Wang,et al.  Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[54]  J. Ben Rosen,et al.  MOPED: Method for optimizing physical energy parameters using decoys , 2003, J. Comput. Chem..

[55]  B. Shoichet,et al.  A specific mechanism of nonspecific inhibition. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[56]  B. Shoichet,et al.  Information decay in molecular docking screens against holo, apo, and modeled conformations of enzymes. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[57]  Brian K Shoichet,et al.  Testing a flexible-receptor docking algorithm in a model binding site. , 2004, Journal of molecular biology.

[58]  D. J. Price,et al.  Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[59]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Computer-assisted design of selective imidazole inhibitors for cytochrome p450 enzymes. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[60]  Conrad C. Huang,et al.  UCSF Chimera—A visualization system for exploratory research and analysis , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[61]  W Patrick Walters,et al.  A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance , 2004, Proteins.

[62]  Brian K. Shoichet,et al.  Molecular Docking and High-Throughput Screening for Novel Inhibitors of Protein Tyrosine Phosphatase-1 B , 2022 .